Forum:Second Chamber
__NEWSECTIONLINK__ Category:ForumCategory:Congress The Second Chamber is one of the two chambers of the Lovian Congress, the federal legislative branch. Unlike in other nations, the lower chamber serves as a room for debating and compromising, and the higher chamber is where Members of the Congress vote bills that have passed through the First Chamber. All inhabitants are allowed entry to the Congress, though only Members of the Congress have the right to actively participate and vote. Older proposals Announcement I will soon clean up the above proposals which are not accepted. All MOTC have one more day to comment or change their vote; we need room for newer proposals such as our Political Reform and the Economic Involvement Act. 07:25, August 6, 2010 (UTC) :Good, you do that :) 15:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) ::The proposals have been moved to the archive (number 7). 06:33, August 7, 2010 (UTC) 2010 State Reform Bill I will not post the full monty here in the 2nd Chamber. I will create voting lists for each of the seven parts. There will be links to the articles under review. If you have questions, just ask. 15:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) When abstaining, please explain why. Abstention is the wish not to vote. If you disagree with the bill, it is better to oppose it than to abstain. 15:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) Content (1): Structural change (Constitution Art. 4) CONTENT: click here MAJORITY REQUIRED: 75%+ (13 MOTCs) PRO # 15:59, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Marcus Villanova WLP 16:02, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # 16:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Jon Johnson 19:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # -- 07:59, August 7, 2010 (UTC) (Probably the nicest part, together with Content 2.) # 08:57, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Bucu 12:45, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 15:31, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Lars Washington 11:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC) # Harold Freeman 09:22, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # Percival E. Galahad 20:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Christina Evans 09:35, August 14, 2010 (UTC) # Sjorskingma 07:54, August 18, 2010 (UTC) No more shit with local levels that remain unfilled. I like it #: We got our full majority here. Please keep voting, MOTCs! 12:46, August 18, 2010 (UTC) ABSTENTION # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:55, August 7, 2010 (UTC) Approved This part of the amendment is approved. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) * 87.5% (14 out of 16) of the MOTCs cast votes. * Of all valid votes, 92.9% were in favor of the bill; 7.1% abstained. * 81.25% of all MOTCs were in favor of the bill; 6.3% abstained; 12.5% did not vote. Content (2): Competencies (Constitution Art. 5) CONTENT: click here MAJORITY REQUIRED: 75%+ PRO # 15:59, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Marcus Villanova WLP 16:02, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # 16:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Jon Johnson 19:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # -- 07:59, August 7, 2010 (UTC) (See comment (1).) # 08:57, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 15:34, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Lars Washington 11:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC) # Harold Freeman 09:22, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # Percival E. Galahad 20:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Christina Evans 09:35, August 14, 2010 (UTC) # SjorskingmaWikistad 07:56, August 18, 2010 (UTC) ABSTENTION # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:55, August 7, 2010 (UTC) Approved This part of the amendment is approved. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) * 81.3% (13 out of 16) of the MOTCs cast votes. * Of all valid votes, 92.3% were in favor of the bill; 7.7% abstained. * 75.0% of all MOTCs were in favor of the bill; 6.3% abstained; 18.8% did not vote. Content (3): Amending the law (Constitution Art. 6-7) CONTENT: click here MAJORITY REQUIRED: 75%+ PRO # 15:59, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Marcus Villanova WLP 16:02, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # 16:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Jon Johnson 19:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # -- 07:59, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # 08:57, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 15:38, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Lars Washington 11:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC) # Harold Freeman 09:22, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # Percival E. Galahad 20:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Christina Evans 09:35, August 14, 2010 (UTC) ABSTENTION # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:56, August 7, 2010 (UTC) Approved This part of the amendment is approved. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) * 75.0% (12 out of 16) of the MOTCs cast votes. * Of all valid votes, 91.7% were in favor of the bill; 8.3% abstained. * 68.8% of all MOTCs were in favor of the bill; 6.3% abstained; 25.0% did not vote. The Constitution requires that more than three fourths of all valid votes cast is in favor of the bill. Those who did not vote, thus, have abandoned their opportunity to oppose the bill. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) Content (4): Elections (Constitution Art. 8) CONTENT: click here MAJORITY REQUIRED: 75%+ PRO # 15:59, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Marcus Villanova WLP 16:03, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # 16:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Jon Johnson 19:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # -- 07:59, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # = 08:58, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:56, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 15:39, August 7, 2010 (UTC) going for a firm majority here! # Lars Washington 11:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC) # Harold Freeman 09:22, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # Percival E. Galahad 20:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Christina Evans 09:35, August 14, 2010 (UTC) Approved This part of the amendment is approved. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) * 75.0% (12 out of 16) of the MOTCs cast votes. * Of all valid votes, all (100.0%) were in favor of the bill. * 75.0% of all MOTCs were in favor of the bill; 25.0% did not vote. Content (5): Trials (Constitution Art. 9-10) CONTENT: click here MAJORITY REQUIRED: 75%+ PRO # 15:59, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Marcus Villanova WLP 16:02, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # 16:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Jon Johnson 19:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # -- 07:55, August 7, 2010 (UTC) (This change was an urgent one. Naranja!) # 08:58, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:57, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 15:41, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Lars Washington 11:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC) # Harold Freeman 09:22, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # Percival E. Galahad 20:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Christina Evans 09:35, August 14, 2010 (UTC) # tempting to abstention. What to do with all the empty state courts? SjorskingmaWikistad 08:04, August 18, 2010 (UTC) #: Easy one: we can use them for government agencies, commercial activities, momunements, museums... Plenty of possibilities 12:45, August 18, 2010 (UTC) Approved This part of the amendment is approved. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) * 81.3% (13 out of 16) of the MOTCs cast votes. * Of all valid votes, all (100.0%) were in favor of the bill. * 81.3% of all MOTCs were in favor of the bill; 18.8% did not vote. Content (6): Police (FL Art. 5-6) CONTENT: click here MAJORITY REQUIRED: 50%+ (9 MOTCs) PRO # 15:59, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Marcus Villanova WLP 16:02, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # 16:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Jon Johnson 19:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # -- 08:01, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # 08:58, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 15:54, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Lars Washington 11:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC) # Harold Freeman 09:22, August 9, 2010 (UTC) #: Okay, another part we have the required majority for. We're getting there. 17:16, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # Percival E. Galahad 20:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Christina Evans 09:35, August 14, 2010 (UTC) CONTRA # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:58, August 7, 2010 (UTC) #: Just curious: I thought you co-authored this state reform? Martha Van Ghent 15:35, August 7, 2010 (UTC) #:: He didn't co-author; Oos Wes and I just worked out the "general idea version" of this reform plan. Nevertheless, I find his contra-vote strange too. On the other hand, it was predictable... 17:02, August 7, 2010 (UTC) #:::A little explanation for my contra: I believe that we should still keep the state police in some way, f.e. keeping the police stations but then they're no longer state police stations, but "local national police stations". If you understand what I mean. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:22, August 8, 2010 (UTC) #::::You're lucky OWTB: that is still very well possible under the FedPol Act . We could very easily maintain a police station in every state or city/town. 10:45, August 8, 2010 (UTC) #:::::Ah ok. Then I'll change my vote è. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 08:20, August 9, 2010 (UTC) #::::::Thanks. Now: why the abstention? 17:16, August 9, 2010 (UTC) #:::::::Cause I don't want to be the last voter :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 09:05, August 11, 2010 (UTC) ABSTENTION # --Bucu 12:55, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 08:20, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # SjorskingmaWikistad 08:06, August 18, 2010 (UTC) Approved This part of the amendment is approved. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) * 87.5% (14 out of 16) of the MOTCs cast votes. * Of all valid votes, 78.6% were in favor of the bill; 21.4% abstained. * 68.8% of all MOTCs were in favor of the bill; 18.8% abstained; 6.3% did not vote. Content (7): Places (FL Art. 7-8) CONTENT: click here MAJORITY REQUIRED: 50%+ PRO # 15:59, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Marcus Villanova WLP 16:02, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # 16:42, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # Jon Johnson 19:58, August 6, 2010 (UTC) # -- 08:01, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # 08:58, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:59, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 15:55, August 7, 2010 (UTC) # Lars Washington 11:04, August 8, 2010 (UTC)$ #: our first content bit passed!! keep voting please! 16:01, August 8, 2010 (UTC) # Harold Freeman 09:22, August 9, 2010 (UTC) # Percival E. Galahad 20:22, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Christina Evans 09:35, August 14, 2010 (UTC) # SjorskingmaWikistad 08:08, August 18, 2010 (UTC) Approved This part of the amendment is approved. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) * 81.3% (13 out of 16) of the MOTCs cast votes. * Of all valid votes, all (100.0%) were in favor of the bill. * 81.3% of all MOTCs were in favor of the bill; 18.8% did not vote. State Reform approved! The 2010 State Reform Bill has been approved by Congress by the required majorities. It might take some time to implement all changes of this amendment. Congratulations to all supporters of the bill! 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) To the non-voters: you choose not to vote = you choose not to participate in democracy. Please vote if you're elected to vote. 12:46, August 29, 2010 (UTC) :Well done! Martha Van Ghent 07:19, August 31, 2010 (UTC) ::Lovia rocks! Jon THE DUDE Johnson 08:19, August 31, 2010 (UTC) Economic Involvement Act Finally ready to vote. 12:29, August 12, 2010 (UTC) Bill (FedLaw) # The federal government of Lovian has the right and power to execute direct economic activities; either ## In the form of a State-Owned Company (SOC), when having a majority of the shares. ### An SOC is headed and run by a branch of the involved federal department(s). ### The goal of an SOC is to provide a certain public service to the people of Lovia. ### Any company providing a public service can become a SOC, by Congressial rule. #### When declared a public service by Congress, only the designated SOC may provide this service. ## In the form of a State-Involved Company (SIC), when having a minority of the shares. ### An SIC is run privately, but with Congress as a shareholder, represented by the involved federal department(s). ### An SIC is a means in the execution of the governmental policies. ### Any company that is of importance to governmental policy may become an SIC. # Only the Congress has the right and power to approve or alter the statute of a SOC or SIC, by altering the Economic Involvement Act in the Federal Law. # The executing powers are responsible for their own economic decisions. # A complete list of all State-Owned and State-Involved Companies and their specifications: ## The Lovian Energy Company, of which 60% of the stocks are owned by Congress, represented by the Department of Energy and Environment; ## The Lovian Water Company, of which all stocks are owned by Congress, represented by the Department of Energy and Environment; ## The Unified Railroad Company, of which 60% of the stocks are owned by Congress, represented by the Department of Transportation. Voting PRO # 12:30, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # But I barley support thiss bill but it would be even more stupid to vote contra! Marcus Villanova WLP 16:32, August 12, 2010 (UTC) #: I really think it is about time Lovians get water out of their taps. Serious, why the hesitation? 16:34, August 12, 2010 (UTC) #::I like the bill and what it does but I like to simplfy but I always think Liberalism over Libertaranism! Marcus Villanova WLP 16:38, August 12, 2010 (UTC) #:::I see, glad you voted pro anyway. I'm only handing out my own companies (and Dimi's). 16:40, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # However i would have liked other solution over this one, but it might simplify anyway Jon Johnson 16:49, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # Although I have my doubts on state-owned railways, I know the importance of state-run electricity and water distribution. Percival E. Galahad 20:24, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # And I'll tell you why: ## A major problem is solved: we finally have proper water supply in all of Lovia. ## By unifying the energy companies and bringing them together as a state-owned corporation, the government can guarantee good and fair prices. ## Our railroads have always been perfectly in order. Until somebody came here to over-build new railroads and billions of railway stops. Useless stuff. To avoid more of this building frenzy, we must unify them and give the authorities and only the authorities the right to organize them. Just as with energy, this allows us to choose low and fair prices. 17:17, August 13, 2010 (UTC) ##: Superb man, the first comment reminds me of il postino Jon Johnson 17:29, August 13, 2010 (UTC) ##:: Haha . Metafore! 18:08, August 13, 2010 (UTC) ##::: Non c'é l'aqua :p Jon Johnson 21:23, August 13, 2010 (UTC) ##:::: You guys know perfectly well how to humiliate someone (me) who did edits in good faith. I spent quite some time on the railways, and the only thing you can say is "'' Until somebody came here to over-build new railroads and billions of railway stops. Useless stuff.''". I'm not in doubt why so many people leave Lovia after a set period of time. If I were you, I should feel ashamed. You really dissapoint me. SjorskingmaWikistad 13:17, August 15, 2010 (UTC) ##::::: As a socialist i had to vote pro, this is a really good bill, sorry but here my ideology speaks, and not something else, it's nothing personal Jon Johnson 13:20, August 15, 2010 (UTC) ##:::::: Your enthusiasm was appreciated; you changing companies in which you don't own stocks was wrong; you building state-owned stations and railways was illegal. 18:22, August 15, 2010 (UTC) ##::::::: The stocks are, like, virtual. I don't see the point. I did my edits in good faith. They were constructive, and if you just say you are okay with them, there is no problem. SjorskingmaWikistad 19:18, August 16, 2010 (UTC) ##:::::::: Ever wondered how many hours I spend on making a map, a seal, write new station articles, rewrite railline articles, change time tables, thinking it all out? And now you want to delete it all. This is bullying someone away, and very childish. SjorskingmaWikistad 19:27, August 16, 2010 (UTC) ##:::::::: I agree with a newly state owned railway company. But: PRC already owns all Lovian lines, so the only thing we need to do as Lovian congress is "buy" PRC. Changing the name to URC is silly, because it costs time to change the name everywhere. I vote pro if we keep the name PRC and keep my precious and time consuming work on the railways. That's a reasonable deal, isn't it? (And if you don't think it is, I exspect it to be not without a good argumentation) SjorskingmaWikistad 19:36, August 16, 2010 (UTC) ##: We love your edits, really, I've been discussing with the pm on the excellent quality of the railroad map! The only issue we have is you not communicating on those extra stations, we actually don't need, but if you had asked, we could of done something Jon THE DUDE Johnson 20:17, August 16, 2010 (UTC) ##:: Just like Jon says, it's not that we don't appreciate effort. We do. The problem is you did not consult ANYBODY. You edited a firm that's not yours. You edited a government ownership (railways) without permission. You built stuff on land that's not yours. All this without even talking to anyone who could have helped you out. No matter how much effort you put in it, you put effort in it without thinking (enough). I'm sorry. 21:54, August 16, 2010 (UTC) ##::: I don't like it when people suggest I lack the ability to think. I consider that an insult. Btw, You agree with the map and stuff, don't you? Why don't you give permission for the stuff right now, and the next time I WILL consult the person in charge of the subject I'm about to edit. SjorskingmaWikistad 08:37, August 17, 2010 (UTC) ##:::: Okay, that 'd be great! We even want to keep your map, but tell me: is it difficult to remove the stations that 'actually' don't exist? btw: don't forget to vote this bill Jon THE DUDE Johnson 09:34, August 17, 2010 (UTC) ##::::: Of course I will vote :) but first I want to be assured Dimitri is okay with it as well. Maybe we can have two stations in Portland? It's quite a big town. (And then I don't have to change my map, and the template, and the other articles.) SjorskingmaWikistad 07:51, August 18, 2010 (UTC) ##:::::: Sorry but in portland i don't want two stations, sorry mate Jon THE DUDE Johnson 10:58, August 18, 2010 (UTC) ##::::::: "but first I want to be assured Dimitri is okay with it as well" => I won't give such a guarantee; because I'm not okay with this theory of yours: "We created sth very nice, and spent hours doing it, and therefore it's immoral to do away with it, regardless of law or rule." 13:22, August 29, 2010 (UTC) # Walden says aye. Martha Van Ghent 15:53, August 16, 2010 (UTC) # 14:17, August 19, 2010 (UTC) # -- 16:14, August 30, 2010 (UTC) # ... CONTRA # --OuWTBsjrief-mich 12:51, August 12, 2010 (UTC) # --Bucu 19:16, August 16, 2010 (UTC) # ... ABSTENTION # I wish not to vote. -- 13:46, August 16, 2010 (UTC) # ... Sports and National Team Act #Lovian boules is recognized as the national sport of Lovia. ##Congress hereby commits itself to protect the sport and its culture as national heritage. #A national sports team is a team that performs a single sport at a high level and represents Lovia during international contests, championships and friendly games. ##Congress can grant a sports team this title and duty by a normal majority. ##The ownership of a national sports team remains with its original proprietor. ##Congress will provide in a part of the expenses of this team to guarantee regular practice and performance. ##Congress may revoke this grant by a normal majority when the team does not represent Lovia correctly, with dignity and without wrongful conduct. ##Congress bars players who abuse narcotics, or any other substance that illegally improves a player's game, or have abused narcotics in the past twelve months from participating in a national sports team. ###Drugs that are prescribed by a fully qualified doctor of medicine may be used. ####At all times, other doctors of medicine may question the prescription and file for re-examination. If two other fully qualified medical professionals find the prescription unnecessary or harmful and therefore illegal, the sportsperson may no longer use the prescribed drugs. #Non-governmental governing bodies in Lovian sports may bar players from playing: ##On reasonable suspicion of drug abuse; ##On ethical grounds, that is when a player acts not appropriately and without dignity, or when he or she has violated the law. #Minors, that is people who have not yet reached the age of eighteen, must be a member of a sports player's union to protect them from wrongful conduct. #Minors may not participate in outside physical training or games when the outside temperature is below 10 degrees Celsius (50°F) or above 35 degrees Celsius (95°F), nor may they participate in inside physical training or games when the temperature in the specific room is below 15 degrees Celsius (59°F) or above 30 degrees Celsius (86°F). #Minors may not accept financial payment for sports achievements. Voting Pro # Marcus Villanova WLP 21:09, August 30, 2010 (UTC) # Martha Van Ghent 07:10, August 31, 2010 (UTC) # I largely agree with Jon but am willing to vote pro. After all we need to start somewhere. 07:14, August 31, 2010 (UTC) # ... Contra #... #... Abstain # , sorry man, but i think all sports are equal, you can't just choose one to protect, no offence, i think we need more laws of this kind, so i don't cote contra Jon THE DUDE Johnson 21:26, August 30, 2010 (UTC) #...